dogma ‘is’ a padlock on your mind often.
maybe not all dogma is bad… need to think about that one some more, there are some basic principles we should adhere to… but the dogma’s in the cartoon… well, you can probarbly guess what i think about them… to have them come out of the mouth of a dog is an insult to dogs. :-)

The most sinful part of the cartoon is the idea that dogs can talk. This is unnatutral and sinful. Moreover, the style of drawing is not realistic which is sinful too. I also think that the man and dog depicted do not actually exist in real life, so the sin of lying is being committed.;)

Having reflected on this for a day, is dogma such a bad thing? In many ways the word ‘dogmatics’ is used to beat the Roman Catholic church. If you go to a seminary you will find timetabled lectures on ‘dogmatics’ hich means that lots of goo protestnts get to feel superior about not being defined by dogma.

So as good prots we go to theological college or bible school where we learn doctrine. What is the difference? Translation from the original language.

Lets face it, some of the best dogmatics was done by Paul in his epistles.

I think the real problem is that many of us make up dogmas as we go. We shout them loudly and prouly.

oso… cheers for pointing out the areas of sin. more sin to follow soon. :-)

i think you’re right robb. with a word of caution, that we don’t get inprisoned by our dogma… even our faith can be idolotrous. the dogma’s in the cartoon inprison everyone. apart from ‘woof, woof, woof’, where the dog is defiantly exercising his freedom to be a dog even though he’s had his head filled with drivel. :-)

Some dogma is good and gives us fixed points in our search for understanding – and the freedom to search – without it we would all end up in some fantasy land that suited our mood at the time, or whatever.

I like to use a map when climbing a mountain. Some paths are not marked,and the Forestry Commission has planted another forest, or cut one down, so the map sometimes differs from reality. But it gives some idea of where the top is and how to get there.

If you don’t exercise your dogma it will grow weak. I think the reason people are afraid of the concept is that it calls their own practice into question.

I agree with the commenters, though, who see an implied ‘dogma is evil’ in the cartoon. Tain’t necessarily so. If we don’t have a clearly understood doctrine, then anything goes. Maybe that’s the whole reason for the popularity of the ‘emerging church.’ Doctrine and dogma are good things, so long as they are grounded in study of Scripture, rather than whatever feels good at the moment.

can’t speak for the states, but the emerging church in britain is orthodox in the main. haven’t personally witnessed any throwing out of orthodox doctrine. study of scripture is not enough… the pharisee’s jesus had a go at knew there scripture better than anyone… but they were a mile off the mark. i see the same thing today in some peoples understanding and application of scripture… it too is often a mile away from the heart of jesus.
i can honestly say that i believe all of the dogma the doggy is spouting is garbage.

I can happily recite the Creed and regard this as dogma which is helpful, the basic nuts and bolts of belief, passed down by our ancestors (who were not stupid and struggled with the same sort of quesions we do) and I believe, to be passed on by us, intact to those who follow. (It would be monumental arrogance to throw out what generations of Christians across the globe and the centuries have held on to).

To go back to the climbing mountain analogy, the Creed is a simple map that points to where the top is. Reality is often at odds with the details that get painted into the map, that’s where dogma on top of basics can let us down. Trees are growing where the map says there are no trees – but the trees are real.

What do we do? 3 options – 1) give up, “the map is hopeless, I quit”; 2) go back to basics “I’ll just believe what I’ve always believed, the Bible is right, reality is wrong” (can be brave and OK but generally a dangerous hiding in dogma); 3) “the Bible says this, reality says that, both are true, what do we do with it?” – which is faith, holding things in tension, accepting paradox, moving towards what God is really like rather than what I’ve always thought he was like.

Chris F – I really like the map analogy. I feel that the acceptance of paradox is so important – It is in paradox that we find the real challenge of faith. If it were merely a question of following the rulebook we would be denying God’s infinite mystery.

Re: Jon’s comment .23 – here in the US it’s a different story entirely. If the dollar didn’t stink, I would move to the US in a heartbeat as my soul connects with the UK Anglican stream.

In a nutshell, US Emergent Church (TM) is largely evangelically driven. As is the case of people rebelling against fundy doctrines, some of these leaders appear to reject any rules and structures whatsoever – hence you end up with what I term “god goo.” However, in their desire to create what they see as the church of the 21st century, they’ve become quite dogmatic and as a result, they tend to be just as exclusionary as the very institutions they rebelled against. Go figure.

What I discovered in doing the research for “Rising from the Ashes: Rethinking Church” is that many people in the US mainline churches who are doing some really amazing work don’t self-identify as “emergent church” because they feel they lack the necessary Ps in order to fit in (Phd, planter/pastor, published and don’t make me explain the last P).

Thanks for the kidn words – I’ve been getting into the whole simplification of Christmas – with little expectations, I find I can really wait to see what happens. Also, in 2007 I went to Israel (and Bethlehem) and Jordan and the holidays take on a really earthiness that didn’t exist before. e.g., when I heard a minister compare the wooden manger to the wooden cross – he was making a salvation point that was slightly nauseous – I went nadda – the managers I saw were really nasty stone structures. Mary and Josephy must have to be desperate as all get out to put their baby in one of those suckers. I know there are historical inaccuracies but the land had a way of speaking a different kind of truth.

I don’t mean those are the only two options just that I infer some people are thinking that it would always be the other way around.

It seems from the cartoon that there is a perception that a person (like me for instance!) with a strict moral code and strong belief in the traditional evangelical gospel framework would necessarily be rude, ungracious, judgemental and intolerant.

I think that dogma is just one of three levels of belief. Opinion is the lowest level of belief, followed by doctrine, then dogma. Problems arise when people confuse these levels of belief ie when an opinion becomes a dogma.

Richard, how are you distinguishing between doctrine and dogma? Essentially they are the same word in a different language. A Roman Catholic seminarian will call it a ‘Lecture in Dogmatics’. An Anglican ordinand will call it a ‘Lecture in Doctrine’. They will both study the formation of the council of Nicea and the collation of the Biblia and then go on to be ordained Deacon in their respective churches…